This article calls into question the key assumptions underlying weighted grading and inquires into the likely consequences of this approach for different groups of students. Among the conclusions reached is that grade weighting tends to benefit students who are relatively advantaged educationally, while further disadvantaging students who face educational challenges.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrooksT. M. (1988). Tracing the disadvantages of first-generation college students: An application of Sussman's opinion sequence model. In SteinmetzS. K. (Ed.), Family and support systems across the life span (pp. 121–134). New York: Plenum Press.
2.
CognardA. (1996, May). The case for weighting grades and waiving classes for gifted and talented high school students. National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, No. RM96226, University of Connecticut.
3.
DeweyJ. (1918). Democracy and education.New York: Free Press.
4.
GoodladJ. I., & KeatingP. (1994). Access to knowledge.New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
5.
GutmannA. (1987). Democratic education.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
HsiaoK. (1992). First generation college students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED351 079).
7.
HellmanC. M. (1996). Academic self-efficacy: Highlighting the first generation students. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 4(1), 69–75.
8.
InmanW. E., and MayesL. (1999). The importance of being first: Unique characteristics of first generation community college students. Community College Review, 26(4), 3–19.
9.
LockhartE. (1990, Winter). Heavy grades? A study on weighted grades. Journal of College Admission, 9–16.
10.
MartinJ. R. (1982). Two dogmas of curriculum. In CahnS. (Ed.), Classic and contemporary reading in the philosophy of education.New York: McGraw-Hill.
11.
National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). (1994). Rank in class, grade point average, and college admissions.Reston, VA: Author.
12.
TalleyN. (1989, Fall). Weighted averages and college admissions. Journal of College Admission, 19–21.
13.
TalleyN., & MohrJ. (1991, Summer). Weighted averages, computer screening, and college admission in public colleges and universities. Journal of College Admission, 9–11.
14.
TalleyN., & MohrJ. (1997, Spring). The argument for non-weighting. Journal of College Admission, 23–25.
15.
TerenziniP. (1996). First generation college students: Characteristics, experience, and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education, 37(1), 1–22.
16.
ViolasP. C., SeneseG. B., & TozerS. E. (1997). School and society: Historical and contemporary perspectives.New York: McGraw-Hill.
